SkillAgentSearch skills...

medical-imaging-review

Write comprehensive literature reviews for medical imaging AI research

Install / Use

npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill medical-imaging-review

Installs into whichever agent you are using.

About this skill
📄

SKILL.md

Installable skill definition

Quality Score

88/100

Supported Platforms

Universal

Our assessment of medical-imaging-review

medical-imaging-review scores 88/100 on our quality scale, 248th of 574 Content & Media skills we index (top 44%).

Its SKILL.md is 4.8 KB long, well organised into 36 sections with 4 code examples: a solid amount of guidance for an agent.

With 4,360 GitHub stars, it is one of the more widely adopted skills in the catalogue.

Substance
26/30
Structure
20/20
Description
12/15
Adoption
15/20
Freshness
15/15

Maintenance, license and trust

  • The repository was last updated 3 days ago, so medical-imaging-review is actively maintained.
  • No license is declared. By default that means all rights are reserved: you can read it, but reusing or redistributing it is not clearly permitted. Ask the author before building on it commercially.
  • Its trust signals score 88/100, with 1 caution from licensing, adoption, age or documentation. These come from repository metadata, not a code audit — read the skill file before letting an agent act on it.

medical-imaging-review compared with similar skills

All 4 of these similar skills score higher than medical-imaging-review; compare them before choosing.

SkillScoreStarsUpdatedFormat
medical-imaging-review (this skill)by brycewang-stanford884.4k3d agoSKILL.md
siyuanby siyuan-note10046.5ktodayMCP Server
algorithmic-artby anthropics100177.9k4d agoSKILL.md
pptxby anthropics100177.9k4d agoSKILL.md
designby nextlevelbuilder100130.2k5d agoSKILL.md

Frequently asked questions

How do I install medical-imaging-review?
Run npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill medical-imaging-review. The install tabs above show the steps for each supported agent.
Which AI agents does medical-imaging-review work with?
It is written for Universal, as a SKILL.md file. Other agents that read the same format can often use it too.
Is medical-imaging-review safe to use?
It declares no license and scores 88/100 on trust signals. Skills are instructions an agent will follow, so read the file before installing it and do not approve commands you do not understand.
Is medical-imaging-review still maintained?
The repository was last updated 3 days ago, so medical-imaging-review is actively maintained.

name: medical-imaging-review description: > Write comprehensive literature reviews for medical imaging AI research. Use when writing survey papers, systematic reviews, or literature analyses on topics like segmentation, detection, classification in CT, MRI, X-ray, ultrasound, or pathology imaging. Triggers on requests for "review paper", "survey", "literature review", "综述", "systematic review", or mentions of writing academic reviews on deep learning for medical imaging. metadata: author: user version: "2.0.0" allowed-tools:

  • Read
  • Write
  • Edit
  • Glob
  • Grep
  • Bash
  • WebSearch
  • WebFetch
  • Task
  • mcp__arxiv-mcp-server__search_papers
  • mcp__arxiv-mcp-server__download_paper
  • mcp__arxiv-mcp-server__read_paper
  • mcp__pubmed-mcp-server__pubmed_search_articles
  • mcp__zotero__zotero_search_items
  • mcp__zotero__zotero_get_item_fulltext

<!-- ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗ ║ 本文件为开源 Skill 原始文档,收录仅供学习与研究参考 ║ ║ CoPaper.AI 收集整理 | https://copaper.ai ║ ╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝ 来源仓库: https://github.com/luwill/research-skills 项目名称: research-skills 开源协议: MIT License 收录日期: 2026-04-02 声明: 本文件版权归原作者所有。此处收录旨在为社会科学实证研究者 提供 AI Agent Skills 的集中参考。如有侵权,请联系删除。 -->

Medical Imaging AI Literature Review Skill

Write comprehensive literature reviews following a systematic 7-phase workflow.

Quick Start

  1. Initialize project with three core files:

    • CLAUDE.md - Writing guidelines and terminology
    • IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md - Staged execution plan
    • manuscript_draft.md - Main manuscript
  2. Follow the 7-phase workflow (see references/WORKFLOW.md)

  3. Use domain-specific templates (see references/DOMAINS.md)


Core Principles

Writing Style

  • Hedging language: "may", "suggests", "appears to", "has shown promising results"
  • Avoid absolutes: Never say "X is the best method"
  • Citation support: Every claim needs reference
  • Limitations: Each method section needs a Limitations paragraph

Required Elements

  • Key Points box (3-5 bullets) after title
  • Comparison table for each major section
  • Performance metrics: Dice (0.XXX), HD95 (X.XX mm)
  • Figure placeholders with detailed captions
  • References: 80-120 typical, organized by topic

Paragraph Structure

Topic sentence (main claim)
  → Supporting evidence (citations + data)
  → Analysis (critical evaluation)
  → Transition to next paragraph

Literature Sources

Use multi-source strategy for comprehensive coverage:

| Source | Best For | Tools | |--------|----------|-------| | ArXiv | Latest DL methods, preprints | search_papers, read_paper | | PubMed | Clinical validation, peer-reviewed | pubmed_search_articles | | Zotero | Existing library, organized refs | zotero_search_items |

For MCP configuration details, see references/MCP_SETUP.md.


Standard Review Structure

# [Title]: State of the Art and Future Directions

## Key Points
- [3-5 bullets summarizing main findings]

## Abstract

## 1. Introduction
### 1.1 Clinical Background
### 1.2 Technical Challenges
### 1.3 Scope and Contributions

## 2. Datasets and Evaluation Metrics
### 2.1 Public Datasets (Table 1)
### 2.2 Evaluation Metrics

## 3. Deep Learning Methods
### 3.1 [Category 1]
### 3.2 [Category 2]
(Table 2: Method Comparison)

## 4. Downstream Applications

## 5. Commercial Products & Clinical Translation (Table 3)

## 6. Discussion
### 6.1 Current Limitations
### 6.2 Future Directions

## 7. Conclusion

## References

Method Description Template

### 3.X [Method Category]

[1-2 paragraph introduction with motivation]

**[Method Name]:** [Author] et al. [ref] proposed [method], which [innovation]:
- [Key component 1]
- [Key component 2]
Achieves Dice of X.XX on [dataset].

**Limitations:** Despite advantages, [category] methods face:
(1) [limit 1]; (2) [limit 2].

Citation Patterns

# Data citation
"...achieved Dice of 0.89 [23]"

# Method citation
"Gu et al. [45] proposed..."

# Multi-citation
"Several studies demonstrated... [12, 15, 23]"

# Comparative
"While [12] focused on..., [15] addressed..."

Reference Files

| File | Purpose | |------|---------| | references/WORKFLOW.md | Detailed 7-phase workflow | | references/TEMPLATES.md | CLAUDE.md and IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md templates | | references/DOMAINS.md | Domain-specific method categories | | references/MCP_SETUP.md | MCP server configuration | | references/QUALITY_CHECKLIST.md | Pre-submission quality checklist |

Related Skills

View on GitHub
GitHub Stars4.4k
CategoryContent
Updated3d ago
Forks527

Languages

Stata

Trust signals

88/100

From repository metadata: license, adoption, age and documentation. Not a code audit — see the Safety scan above for what the skill file itself contains.

1 medium